LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

RAHUL versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER

Citation: [2024] 8 S.C.R. 287 · Decided: 09-08-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SUDHANSHU DHULIA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 8 S.C.R. 287 : 2024 INSC 598
Rahul 
v. 
National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another
(Civil Appeal No. 8614 of 2024)
09 August 2024
[Sudhanshu Dhulia and R. Mahadevan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
High Court, if justified in reducing the percentage of disability 
suffered by the pillion rider who met with an accident from 25% as 
fixed by the tribunal, to 20% while determining the compensation 
payable to him.
Headnotes†
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Motor accident – Compensation – 
Reduction of the percentage of disability suffered in a motor 
accident by the claimant-pillion rider on a motorcycle from 
25% as fixed by the tribunal to 20% by the High Court and 
re-assessed the compensation – Correctness:
Held: Pillion rider underwent a surgery in which, plates and screws 
were implanted in his hands – As per disability certificate issued by 
the doctor, the pillion rider suffered 50% permanent disablement 
and the said doctor was also examined as prosecution witness – 
Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the tribunal 
took the disability of the pillion rider only at 25% and determined 
the compensation payable to him – Without assigning plausible 
reason, the High Court re-assessed the compensation by reducing 
the disability suffered by the pillion rider to 20% – Reduction of 
compensation was not required, when there was no basis in 
support thereof – Thus, the judgment passed by the High Court 
set aside and that of the tribunal fixing the disability of the pillion 
rider at 25% restored. [Paras 10, 11]
List of Keywords
Reducing the percentage of disability suffered; Compensation; 
Motor accident; Disability certificate; Permanent disablement; 
Reduction of compensation. 
* Author
288
[2024] 8 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 8614 of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.11.2018 of the High Court 
of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad in MFA No. 103118 of 2014
Appearances for Parties
Manjunath Meled, Mrs. Vijayalaxmi Meled, Ganesh Kumar R., Advs. 
for the Appellant.
Manu Luv Shahalia, Ms. Manjeet Chawla, Abid Ali, Manek Sharma, 
Advs. for the Respondents.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
R. Mahadevan, J.
1.	
Delay condoned.
2.	
Leave granted.
3.	
In the present case, the appellant challenges the final judgment 
dated 13.11.2018 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad 
Bench, (hereinafter shortly referred to as “the High Court”), thereby 
partly allowing MFA No. 103118/2014 (MV) filed by the Respondent 
No.1 (hereinafter referred to as “the insurance company”).
4.	
Originally, the appellant filed a claim petition in MAC No.1587 of 
2013 before the Senior Civil Judge & MACT at Raibag (hereinafter 
shortly referred to as “the Tribunal”), seeking a compensation 
of Rs. 20,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a motor 
accident that had occurred on 27.01.2013, while he was travelling 
as a pillion rider in the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-23/
EC-6369 insured with the insurance company. Based on the oral 
and documentary evidence, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 
5,38,872/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till 
deposit, as compensation payable to the appellant, after taking into 
account the disability sustained by him at 25%. Aggrieved by the 
same, the insurance company filed an appeal in MFA No. 103118 
of 2014 (MV) before the High Court. 
5.	
After hearing both sides, the High Court re-assessed the compensation 
by reducing it to Rs. 4,74,072/- by taking into consideration, disability 
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 
289
Rahul v. National Insurance Company Ltd. and Another
only at 20% and allowed the appeal in part, by the final judgment 
dated 13.11.2018, which is under challenge before us. 
6.	
The learned counsel for the appellant, drawing the attention of this 
court to Exs.P56 to 60, medical records pertaining to the appellant, 
submitted that the appellant sustained three injuries viz., fracture of 
right radius, fracture of left radius and fracture of styloid process of 
ulna, for which, he had undergone surgery and plates and screws 
were implanted in his both hands. The doctor N.Y. Joshi gave Ex.P57, 
disability certificate to the effect that the appellant suffered 50% 
disability, as a whole. Based on the same, the Tribunal determined 
the compensation under the head ‘Loss of future income’ by taking 
into account the disability at 25%. However, the High Court re-
d

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.